Is This Shooting Justified?

[Browning4AU 405]

Based on escalation of force, a noncompliant "perpetrator" or person in question who reaches in his waistband for a gun, it's a completely justifiable shooting. I can't see the video so I don't know what happened. Just going by the posts above.

Terrorist organizations use young men and sometimes kids to suicide bomb crowded places. If you're a military patrol and you see a kid with a suicide vest on are you going to wait for him to put his thumb on the button and potentially harm hundreds of people? Difficult question, but these are all difficult situations.

I get all of that but facts are facts and the police are losing the public. Unless they figure it out, it's going to get much worse.

http://www.propublic...black-and-white

This tells us absolutely nothing and is far from them getting killed solely because they're black. Also...in the article, what percentage of those people it constantly talks about were commiting crimes? Did I miss it?

[icanthearyou 4,463]

I'm saying not justified. When a kid is involved make sure, double sure, triple sure that he poses a serious threat before applying deadly force. Reaching into a waistband doesnt get you to deadly force. The movie American Sniper comes out in theaters this Christmas and the trailer reminds me of this.

AMERICAN SNIPER Trailer #1 (2014) Bradley Cooper,…:

http://youtu.be/8ZtrhRRw53Y

Adult or kid, white or black, when he reaches into his waistband where you see a gun, does he pose a serious threat? Or do you wait until he shoots to determine if he poses a serious threat?

If it's a kid, I might even wait until he fires a round. What prevented the officer from rolling in open and take cover behind his door, shine that huge light he has to make sure? We have escalation of force procedures, he went straight to step three, applying deadly force.

You must think that a bullet from a kid won't kill you? "Wait until he fires a round" is saying some lawbreaker's life is worth more than yours. Also, a car door is not effective cover, bullets go right through car doors. I'd think anybody in the military would know that.

You do not see any other options? If someone has a gun, you immediately shoot them?

[icanthearyou 4,463]

Based on escalation of force, a noncompliant "perpetrator" or person in question who reaches in his waistband for a gun, it's a completely justifiable shooting. I can't see the video so I don't know what happened. Just going by the posts above.

Terrorist organizations use young men and sometimes kids to suicide bomb crowded places. If you're a military patrol and you see a kid with a suicide vest on are you going to wait for him to put his thumb on the button and potentially harm hundreds of people? Difficult question, but these are all difficult situations.

I get all of that but facts are facts and the police are losing the public. Unless they figure it out, it's going to get much worse.

http://www.propublic...black-and-white

This tells us absolutely nothing and is far from them getting killed solely because they're black. Also...in the article, what percentage of those people it constantly talks about were commiting crimes? Did I miss it?

I agree that it is not an absolute but, I do believe it is an indicator. When I was a child, white people could, and did, refer to black people openly and unabashedly by using racial slurs. That is a lot of prejudice, hatred, and racism to overcome in less than fifty years. Progress has been made but, there is still work to be done.

[homersapien 11,385]

Based on escalation of force, a noncompliant "perpetrator" or person in question who reaches in his waistband for a gun, it's a completely justifiable shooting. I can't see the video so I don't know what happened. Just going by the posts above.

Terrorist organizations use young men and sometimes kids to suicide bomb crowded places. If you're a military patrol and you see a kid with a suicide vest on are you going to wait for him to put his thumb on the button and potentially harm hundreds of people? Difficult question, but these are all difficult situations.

I get all of that but facts are facts and the police are losing the public. Unless they figure it out, it's going to get much worse.

http://www.propublic...black-and-white

This tells us absolutely nothing and is far from them getting killed solely because they're black. Also...in the article, what percentage of those people it constantly talks about were commiting crimes? Did I miss it?

I agree that it is not an absolute b ut, I do believe it is an indicator. When I was a child, white people could, and did, refer to black people openly and unabashedly by using racial slurs. That is a lot of prejudice, hatred, and racism to overcome in less than fifty years. Progress has been made but, there is still work to be done.

It's not just racial prejudice per se', it's the paradigm of blacks as likely criminals. There is little doubt in my mind that a 12-year-old (for example) black kid is more likely to be shot by a white policeman than a 12-year-old white kid everything else being equal. And that doesn't necessarily mean the policeman has racist views.

[homersapien 11,385]

I'm saying not justified. When a kid is involved make sure, double sure, triple sure that he poses a serious threat before applying deadly force. Reaching into a waistband doesnt get you to deadly force. The movie American Sniper comes out in theaters this Christmas and the trailer reminds me of this.

AMERICAN SNIPER Trailer #1 (2014) Bradley Cooper,…:

http://youtu.be/8ZtrhRRw53Y

Adult or kid, white or black, when he reaches into his waistband where you see a gun, does he pose a serious threat? Or do you wait until he shoots to determine if he poses a serious threat?

If it's a kid, I might even wait until he fires a round. What prevented the officer from rolling in open and take cover behind his door, shine that huge light he has to make sure? We have escalation of force procedures, he went straight to step three, applying deadly force.

You must think that a bullet from a kid won't kill you? "Wait until he fires a round" is saying some lawbreaker's life is worth more than yours. Also, a car door is not effective cover, bullets go right through car doors. I'd think anybody in the military would know that.

You do not see any other options? If someone has a gun, you immediately shoot them?

This is another aspect of the problem - a militaristic mind-set of police work.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

I'm saying not justified. When a kid is involved make sure, double sure, triple sure that he poses a serious threat before applying deadly force. Reaching into a waistband doesnt get you to deadly force. The movie American Sniper comes out in theaters this Christmas and the trailer reminds me of this.

AMERICAN SNIPER Trailer #1 (2014) Bradley Cooper,…:

http://youtu.be/8ZtrhRRw53Y

Adult or kid, white or black, when he reaches into his waistband where you see a gun, does he pose a serious threat? Or do you wait until he shoots to determine if he poses a serious threat?

If it's a kid, I might even wait until he fires a round. What prevented the officer from rolling in open and take cover behind his door, shine that huge light he has to make sure? We have escalation of force procedures, he went straight to step three, applying deadly force.

You must think that a bullet from a kid won't kill you? "Wait until he fires a round" is saying some lawbreaker's life is worth more than yours. Also, a car door is not effective cover, bullets go right through car doors. I'd think anybody in the military would know that.

You do not see any other options? If someone has a gun, you immediately shoot them?

This is another aspect of the problem - a militaristic mind-set of police work.

You're clear as mud.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

Based on escalation of force, a noncompliant "perpetrator" or person in question who reaches in his waistband for a gun, it's a completely justifiable shooting. I can't see the video so I don't know what happened. Just going by the posts above.

Terrorist organizations use young men and sometimes kids to suicide bomb crowded places. If you're a military patrol and you see a kid with a suicide vest on are you going to wait for him to put his thumb on the button and potentially harm hundreds of people? Difficult question, but these are all difficult situations.

I get all of that but facts are facts and the police are losing the public. Unless they figure it out, it's going to get much worse.

http://www.propublic...black-and-white

This tells us absolutely nothing and is far from them getting killed solely because they're black. Also...in the article, what percentage of those people it constantly talks about were commiting crimes? Did I miss it?

I agree that it is not an absolute b ut, I do believe it is an indicator. When I was a child, white people could, and did, refer to black people openly and unabashedly by using racial slurs. That is a lot of prejudice, hatred, and racism to overcome in less than fifty years. Progress has been made but, there is still work to be done.

It's not just racial prejudice per se', it's the paradigm of blacks as likely criminals. There is little doubt in my mind that a 12-year-old (for example) black kid is more likely to be shot by a white policeman than a 12-year-old white kid everything else being equal. And that doesn't necessarily mean the policeman has racist views.

That is what I meant by indicator, not absolute. I am guessing but, I would think the data could just as easily say that poor children are more likely to be shot by police officers. Doesn't mean the police hate poor people. However, I have known policemen who were racists. I have known one who said his racism is what motivated him to become an officer.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

New information, slightly better video.

http://news.yahoo.com/cleveland-release-video-boy-shot-officer-110012912.html

[around4ever 4,139]

Didn't appear to much time for any commands or questions from the officer. You can't tell from the video where the gun was or what the kid was doing or saying.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

No way those officers had a chance to tell him anything three times before they shot him. I don't think this is a justifiable shooting.

[Mikey 16,615]

I'm saying not justified. When a kid is involved make sure, double sure, triple sure that he poses a serious threat before applying deadly force. Reaching into a waistband doesnt get you to deadly force. The movie American Sniper comes out in theaters this Christmas and the trailer reminds me of this.

AMERICAN SNIPER Trailer #1 (2014) Bradley Cooper,…:

http://youtu.be/8ZtrhRRw53Y

Adult or kid, white or black, when he reaches into his waistband where you see a gun, does he pose a serious threat? Or do you wait until he shoots to determine if he poses a serious threat?

If it's a kid, I might even wait until he fires a round. What prevented the officer from rolling in open and take cover behind his door, shine that huge light he has to make sure? We have escalation of force procedures, he went straight to step three, applying deadly force.

You must think that a bullet from a kid won't kill you? "Wait until he fires a round" is saying some lawbreaker's life is worth more than yours. Also, a car door is not effective cover, bullets go right through car doors. I'd think anybody in the military would know that.

You do not see any other options? If someone has a gun, you immediately shoot them?

Assuming he is an attacker and is threatening me with his gun I certainly try shoot him as fast as I can, hopefully before he shoots me. In a life or death situation who lives and who dies is usually determined in a matter of micro-seconds. If it later turns out he was using a toy gun that was his folly, I didn't have time to check into the matter in depth.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

If the kid reached into his waistband making the officer think he had a real weapon, why not say that? Why lie and say that you told the kid three times to drop the weapon when it's clear from the video that there's no way anyone had time to issue three commands before he shot him?

[homersapien 11,385]

I'm saying not justified. When a kid is involved make sure, double sure, triple sure that he poses a serious threat before applying deadly force. Reaching into a waistband doesnt get you to deadly force. The movie American Sniper comes out in theaters this Christmas and the trailer reminds me of this.

AMERICAN SNIPER Trailer #1 (2014) Bradley Cooper,…:

http://youtu.be/8ZtrhRRw53Y

Adult or kid, white or black, when he reaches into his waistband where you see a gun, does he pose a serious threat? Or do you wait until he shoots to determine if he poses a serious threat?

If it's a kid, I might even wait until he fires a round. What prevented the officer from rolling in open and take cover behind his door, shine that huge light he has to make sure? We have escalation of force procedures, he went straight to step three, applying deadly force.

You must think that a bullet from a kid won't kill you? "Wait until he fires a round" is saying some lawbreaker's life is worth more than yours. Also, a car door is not effective cover, bullets go right through car doors. I'd think anybody in the military would know that.

You do not see any other options? If someone has a gun, you immediately shoot them?

This is another aspect of the problem - a militaristic mind-set of police work.

You're clear as mud.

Is that a request for additional explanation?

[Browning4AU 405]

Based on escalation of force, a noncompliant "perpetrator" or person in question who reaches in his waistband for a gun, it's a completely justifiable shooting. I can't see the video so I don't know what happened. Just going by the posts above.

Terrorist organizations use young men and sometimes kids to suicide bomb crowded places. If you're a military patrol and you see a kid with a suicide vest on are you going to wait for him to put his thumb on the button and potentially harm hundreds of people? Difficult question, but these are all difficult situations.

I get all of that but facts are facts and the police are losing the public. Unless they figure it out, it's going to get much worse.

http://www.propublic...black-and-white

This tells us absolutely nothing and is far from them getting killed solely because they're black. Also...in the article, what percentage of those people it constantly talks about were commiting crimes? Did I miss it?

I agree that it is not an absolute but, I do believe it is an indicator. When I was a child, white people could, and did, refer to black people openly and unabashedly by using racial slurs. That is a lot of prejudice, hatred, and racism to overcome in less than fifty years. Progress has been made but, there is still work to be done.

My original question still stands. What's the correlation between that goofy little picture and crimes being committed? We live in a society where it's socially acceptable to use those very same racial slurs you bring up, except the prerequisite is you have to be black otherwise it's RACIST. Same way with these black homicides...93-94% of black homicides are by other black people and that doesn't fill the news. As soon as a white guy is involved in homicide where a black individual is killed, it's automatically racist. AUTOMATIC. This tells me and the rest of the US, that it's ok to use deragatory terms towards blacks or to kill black people as long as you're black (not necessarily the case, but as long as we're talking as if perception is reality...)

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

Audio of the 9-1-1 call. One take away is the 9-1-1 operator needs more training. The caller says, "he may be a juvenile" and also says the gun "is probably fake"

http://www.latimes.c...-htmlstory.html

In another call that I have not found yet, the caller states that the perpetrator may be 20. So the police had a description but was not sure of who they were dealing with.

It is here where the cop says he is 20

http://abcnews.go.com/US/video-police-shooting-boy-toy-gun-released/story?id=27198246

[alexava 6,973]

I'm saying not justified. When a kid is involved make sure, double sure, triple sure that he poses a serious threat before applying deadly force. Reaching into a waistband doesnt get you to deadly force. The movie American Sniper comes out in theaters this Christmas and the trailer reminds me of this.

AMERICAN SNIPER Trailer #1 (2014) Bradley Cooper,…:

http://youtu.be/8ZtrhRRw53Y

Adult or kid, white or black, when he reaches into his waistband where you see a gun, does he pose a serious threat? Or do you wait until he shoots to determine if he poses a serious threat?

If it's a kid, I might even wait until he fires a round. What prevented the officer from rolling in open and take cover behind his door, shine that huge light he has to make sure? We have escalation of force procedures, he went straight to step three, applying deadly force.

You must think that a bullet from a kid won't kill you? "Wait until he fires a round" is saying some lawbreaker's life is worth more than yours. Also, a car door is not effective cover, bullets go right through car doors. I'd think anybody in the military would know that.

You do not see any other options? If someone has a gun, you immediately shoot them?

Assuming he is an attacker and is threatening me with his gun I certainly try shoot him as fast as I can, hopefully before he shoots me. In a life or death situation who lives and who dies is usually determined in a matter of micro-seconds. If it later turns out he was using a toy gun that was his folly, I didn't have time to check into the matter in depth.

good for us all you are not a cop.

[Browning4AU 405]

I'm saying not justified. When a kid is involved make sure, double sure, triple sure that he poses a serious threat before applying deadly force. Reaching into a waistband doesnt get you to deadly force. The movie American Sniper comes out in theaters this Christmas and the trailer reminds me of this.

AMERICAN SNIPER Trailer #1 (2014) Bradley Cooper,…:

http://youtu.be/8ZtrhRRw53Y

Adult or kid, white or black, when he reaches into his waistband where you see a gun, does he pose a serious threat? Or do you wait until he shoots to determine if he poses a serious threat?

If it's a kid, I might even wait until he fires a round. What prevented the officer from rolling in open and take cover behind his door, shine that huge light he has to make sure? We have escalation of force procedures, he went straight to step three, applying deadly force.

You must think that a bullet from a kid won't kill you? "Wait until he fires a round" is saying some lawbreaker's life is worth more than yours. Also, a car door is not effective cover, bullets go right through car doors. I'd think anybody in the military would know that.

You do not see any other options? If someone has a gun, you immediately shoot them?

Assuming he is an attacker and is threatening me with his gun I certainly try shoot him as fast as I can, hopefully before he shoots me. In a life or death situation who lives and who dies is usually determined in a matter of micro-seconds. If it later turns out he was using a toy gun that was his folly, I didn't have time to check into the matter in depth.

good for us all you are not a cop.

All of "us" as in who? People running around threatening others with a gun? I hope a lot of you are never in a situation that puts you in harms way, because based on some of these comments, you'll be the ones that end up dead.

[Mikey 16,615]

good for us all you are not a cop.

If you are ever walking down a street with a friend and the two of you are accosted by a drugged-up armed robber, you better hope that friend you are walking with is me. I won't hesitate to protect us from an untimely death.

[AUDub 11,153]

This is the kind of attitude that lead to the unnecessary deaths of Amadou Diallo, Stephen Eugene Washington and many others. Shoot first and ask questions later. These officers are so afraid for their lives they make deadly mistakes.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

My question still stands...if the cops truly feel they were justified in shooting when they did, why do they feel the need to say they warned the kid three times to drop his weapon when it's clear from the video that there is no friggin' way he had a chance to say anything three times before he shot him? The car had barely come to a stop before he was out the door and firing.

[alexava 6,973]

good for us all you are not a cop.

If you are ever walking down a street with a friend and the two of you are accosted by a drugged-up armed robber, you better hope that friend you are walking with is me. I won't hesitate to protect us from an untimely death.

if my son is playing outside with one of his many air soft guns and the police accost him i hope like hell you are not the responding officer. if you cant take a few seconds to distinguish a drugged up armed robber from a child you shouldnt wear a badge.

[alexava 6,973]

good for us all you are not a cop.

If you are ever walking down a street with a friend and the two of you are accosted by a drugged-up armed robber, you better hope that friend you are walking with is me. I won't hesitate to protect us from an untimely death.

if my son is playing outside with one of his many air soft guns and the police accost him i hope like hell you are not the responding officer. if you cant take a few seconds to distinguish a drugged up armed robber from a child you shouldnt wear a badge.

that kid got smoked in 2 seconds. i will usually side with LE when they are at risk. i saw absolutely zero risk in that video.

[around4ever 4,139]

Based on escalation of force, a noncompliant "perpetrator" or person in question who reaches in his waistband for a gun, it's a completely justifiable shooting. I can't see the video so I don't know what happened. Just going by the posts above.

Terrorist organizations use young men and sometimes kids to suicide bomb crowded places. If you're a military patrol and you see a kid with a suicide vest on are you going to wait for him to put his thumb on the button and potentially harm hundreds of people? Difficult question, but these are all difficult situations.

I get all of that but facts are facts and the police are losing the public. Unless they figure it out, it's going to get much worse.

http://www.propublic...black-and-white

This tells us absolutely nothing and is far from them getting killed solely because they're black. Also...in the article, what percentage of those people it constantly talks about were commiting crimes? Did I miss it?

I agree that it is not an absolute but, I do believe it is an indicator. When I was a child, white people could, and did, refer to black people openly and unabashedly by using racial slurs. That is a lot of prejudice, hatred, and racism to overcome in less than fifty years. Progress has been made but, there is still work to be done.

My original question still stands. What's the correlation between that goofy little picture and crimes being committed? We live in a society where it's socially acceptable to use those very same racial slurs you bring up, except the prerequisite is you have to be black otherwise it's RACIST. Same way with these black homicides...93-94% of black homicides are by other black people and that doesn't fill the news. As soon as a white guy is involved in homicide where a black individual is killed, it's automatically racist. AUTOMATIC. This tells me and the rest of the US, that it's ok to use deragatory terms towards blacks or to kill black people as long as you're black (not necessarily the case, but as long as we're talking as if perception is reality...)

Hmmm? Sound racist to anybody else?

[homersapien 11,385]

My original question still stands. What's the correlation between that goofy little picture and crimes being committed? We live in a society where it's socially acceptable to use those very same racial slurs you bring up, except the prerequisite is you have to be black otherwise it's RACIST. Same way with these black homicides...93-94% of black homicides are by other black people and that doesn't fill the news. As soon as a white guy is involved in homicide where a black individual is killed, it's automatically racist. AUTOMATIC. This tells me and the rest of the US, that it's ok to use deragatory terms towards blacks or to kill black people as long as you're black (not necessarily the case, but as long as we're talking as if perception is reality...)

[homersapien 11,385]

My question still stands...if the cops truly feel they were justified in shooting when they did, why do they feel the need to say they warned the kid three times to drop his weapon when it's clear from the video that there is no friggin' way he had a chance to say anything three times before he shot him? The car had barely come to a stop before he was out the door and firing.

Because they know they f******ed up.